how can we…? connecting inventive social research with ... · (chen et al 2016; julier and...

How can we…? Connecting inventive social research with social and

government innovation

LucyKimbell

AfterwordinNoortjeMarres,MichaelGuggenheimandAlexWilkie(eds).2018.

InventingtheSocial.Manchester:MatteringPress.

Pleasecitefrompublishedversion,notthisone.

Intheirintroductiontheeditorsarguethatinventiveapproachestosocial

researchcombine“thedoing,representingandinterveningintosociallife”

(Marresetal,ppxx).Theyemphasisehowsociallife–andresearch–existsinthe

makingandforegroundwhyinventiveapproachesshouldbeexperimental.The

carryingoutandassessmentofsuchexperimentationindoing,representingand

interveningintosociallifeisalwaysinquestion.Theyargueforthevalueof

(researchers)pursuinglong-termassociationsandchangestosociallife.But

theypointtothelimitationsofprioritisingeasilytraceable,short-term

associationsbetweensocialresearchandsocialactionwhichmightresult,for

example,inDasKapitalnotbeingseenasabletodemonstrateresearchimpactor

policyrelevance.

Thisafterwordexplorestheseideasinrelationtotwocontemporarydomainsof

sociallifeinwhichsuchcreativeexperimentationisevident.Itsuggestshow

inventivesocialresearchasdiscussedinthisvolumemightintersectwith

developmentsinthefieldsofsocialinnovationandgovernmentinnovation.

SocialinnovationisoneofthenewsocialsidentifiedbyMarresandGerlitzin

theirchapter,atermgiventoanareaofpracticeandscholarshipthataimsto

addresssocialneedsthroughcreatingstrategies,infrastructures,ventures,

productsorservicesthatinvolvenewconfigurationsofresources(Mulganetal

2006;NichollsandMurdock2011).Acloselyrelatedareaofgovernment

innovationisanemerginginstitutionalpracticewithinnational,regionaland

localgovernmentadministrations,oftenintheformof‘policylabs’(egOECD

2016;Putticketal2014;Williams2015).Insuchsettings,diverseactors

includinggovernments,communityorganisations,fundersandbusinesses

conductexperimentsintocontemporarysociallife,sometimesincollaboration

withacademicresearchers.Inboth,thedevicesandpracticesof‘socialdesign’

areincreasinglyvisibleasaresourcetodrivecreativityandconnectpublic

servantsandotherswithcitizensandotherpublics,oftenwithunclearresults

(Chenetal2016;JulierandKimbell2016).

Myaimhereistomixinsightsfromthisbookwiththecreativepracticestiedup

withhowpublicpolicies,solutionsandservicesarebeingconstituted,

researched,designed,developedandevaluatedastheyco-emergeinrelationto

socialissuesandpolicyagendas.InwhatfollowsIreviewsomeoftheconcerns

ofparticipantsinthisworldofsocialandgovernmentinnovation.Ithenidentify

opportunitiesforinventivesocialresearchtoreconfiguretheseevents,

narrativesandpractices.FinallyIsuggestsomeissuesthatresultfromusingan

inventiveapproachinrelationtosocialinnovationandtogovernment

experimentation.Assomeonewithstakesinthesemattersasacitizen,user,

researcher,educatorandconsultant,mydiscussionisunapologetically

interventionistandactivisti.ItakewhatIunderstandtobethepossibilitiesof

inventivesocialresearchandexplorehowitcanreconfiguredevices,practices

andnarrativesassociatedwith‘innovation’tochangehowthingsaredonein

publicpolicycontexts.Myhopeisthattheacademicdiscussioninthisbook,

whichrecognizesthepotentialforengagementbetweensocialresearchand

creativepracticeandexperimentationinsociallifecanintersectproductively

withthepracticesofsocialandgovernmentinnovationthroughwhichpublic

issuesareformedandaddressed.Howeverthismightpresentsomechallenges

becauseoftheemphasisintheseworldsondemonstratingshort-term

achievementsandeasilytraceablepassagesbetweeninsightandevidenceand

actionandoutcome.

Theword‘innovation’hasgainedwidecurrencyinacontextinwhichneo-

liberalismincreasinglypushespublicservants,politiciansandcitizenstocome

upwithnovelsolutionstosociety’sissues.Socialandgovernmentinnovationare

perhapsbettercharacterizedasinvention(Barry2001),whichforegroundsthe

processualandperformativenatureofhownovelsolutionsareconstitutedand

re-made.Inventionmightbeseenasaphaseorstagewithinaninnovation

process,emphasisingthereconfiguringofconstituentelementsintonovel

arrangements,whichcannotbepre-determined(Garudetal2013).Butmore

thanatemporalphase,theconceptofinventionalsopointstothelogicsthrough

whichnewcombinationsofresourcesareassembledandthroughwhichnew

publicsandissuesarebroughtintobeing.

Recentdevelopmentssuggestgrowingvisibilityofactivitiesseenas,orhopedto

resultin,innovationinrelationtopublicadministrations,withclosealignmentto

relatedexperimentationhappeninginbusiness.Argumentsfor‘mission-

oriented’innovationintoday’sgovernments(egMazzucato2013)intersectwith

‘agile’softwaredevelopment(egGovernmentDigitalService2016),‘lean’start

up(egRies2011),‘smart’government(egNoveck2015)andnewpartnerships

betweengovernment,businessandsocialenterprise(EggersandMacmillan

2013).Suchdevelopmentshaveco-emergedalongsiderelatedactivitieswithin

thinktanksandcommunityandvoluntarygroupsaswellasbeinginformedby

academicresearchii.Theyarealsoshapedbyneo-liberaldriverswithinsome

governmentstopromoteausterity,drivecommercialisationofpublicservice

provisionandco-producesolutionswithsocialactors,sometimesshiftingthe

responsibilityforaddressingsociety’sissuesawayfromgovernmentstoothers

(Julier2017).Asaresult,todifferingextents,itispossibletofindbigdata

analysis,digitalplatforms,socialmediaengagementandanalysis,randomised

controltrials,participatorydesignandsocialandbehaviouralresearchused

alongsideoneanothertogenerateandexploresuchsolutionstopolicyissues(in

thecaseofgovernmentinnovation)ortoaddressproblemsthatmayresultfrom

policydecisionsandactions,ortheirlack(inthecaseofsocialinnovation).

Commontobothsocialandgovernmentinnovationarepreoccupationswith,and

narrativesabout,experimentation,politics,participationandsystemschange.

Challengesinsocialandgovernmentinnovation

Muchsocialandgovernmentinnovationascurrentlyorganisedistiedupwith

‘challenges’.Sometimesachallengeissimplyexpressedintheformofa

summaryofanissueandaquestionstarting‘howcanwe…?’iiiSuchchallenges

arearticulationsofissueswhichmanagersofpublicservices,policymakers,

funders,businessesandentrepreneursaswellasuniversitiesandthirdsector

groupsorganisethemselvesinrelationto,possiblywiththeinvolvementof

academicsandwithacademicresearch.Familiartopicsincludeaddressing

environmentalchange,tacklingobesityorimprovingprospectsforpeoplefacing

unemployment.Theconstructionandarticulationofsuchchallengestakesa

varietyofformsdependingonone’slocationinrelationtoanissue,withvarying

degreesofagency,accountabilityandlegitimacy.Forexamplefunders,

consultancies,universities,thinktanks,communitygroupsandservice

provsidersmayconstructorbeinvitedtorespondtoachallengeviamechanisms

suchasinvitationstotender,callsforproposals,competitions,sandpits,jams,

anddesignbriefs,withassociatedplatforms,resources,networks,fundingand

meansofassessingtowhatextentachallengecanorhasbeenaddressed.

Funders,policyteams,researchersandmanagersseektomobilisediverse

resourcesinaddressinganissueincludingresearchers,professionals,citizens,

activistsor‘users’–oftenwithuncertainmotivations,accountabilitiesor

rewardsanddifferentlevelsofurgency–alongsidedifferentinstitutional

researchcapacities,organisationalroutines,datasetsandmodesofparticipation.

Indeed,suchistheextentofthechallengethatthereisnowacentrestudying

andgivingguidanceonorganisingoneiv.Accordingly,inwhatfollowsIidentify

someofthecurrentchallengeswithinsocialinnovationandgovernment

innovation,informedbymyresearchandpracticeintheUK.Aspresentedbelow,

thesechallengesarealsoapproachesortechniquesusedtoaddresspublicissues.

Buttheyarethemselvesorganisationalissueswithwhichpublicleadersand

managersarepreoccupied,inacontextinwhichtheyarerequiredtoproduce

their‘innovations’.

Thechallengeofunderstandingandsettingissues.Oftendescribedas‘wicked’

(RittelandWebber1972)or‘complex’(egSnowdenandBoone2007),today’s

problemsarticulatedinthecontextofsocialinnovationorpolicyinnovationare

dynamic,multi-actorandmulti-sited.Informedbyperspectivesinsystems

theory,futuresandstrategicmanagement,therehasbeenrecognitionforseveral

decadesthat‘transdisciplinaryapproaches’(Bernstein2015)areneededto

addresssuchissues.Issuessuchasloweducationalattainmentforwhite

workingclassboysintheUKcrosstheboundariesofdisciplines,organisational

capabilities,sitesofpracticeandscalesofgovernment,requiringactorstowork

togethertounderstandthesocialworldtheywanttochange.Suchissuesare

seenasdynamicandinfluxandashavinginterdependencies,contingenciesand

feedbackloopsthatmakethemhardtoidentify,describeoranalyse.Issuesco-

emergewithpublics;non-governmentstakeholderscanplayactiverolesin

enrollingothersintoanissue(Marres2005;Hillgrenetal2016).Butdespite

thesemoves,inmanycasespolicyorsocialproblemshaveendured,despitethe

applicationoveryearsofdifferentkindsofexpertise,analysis,investmentsin

organizationalchange,changesinleadership,technology,andotherresourcesas

wellasfluctuationsincollectivevisionsaboutwhichproblemsmatter.Different

assumptionsplayouthereaboutwhatcountsasevidencethatthereisanissue,

whatkindofissueitisandforwhom.Bigdataandbehaviouralresearchare

increasinglyevidentasresourcesanddriversoforganisationalattentioninthe

policyecosystem(Dunleavy2016).Suchevidenceisoftentiedtothecapacities

ofcorporationstoassemble,organiseandanalyselargedatasetsproviding

particularkindsofsocialdata.Butalongsidebigdatatooaremicro-social

perspectivesfromethnographyaswellasparticipatoryapproachestoexploring

issuesthroughworkshops,eventsandonlineplatforms.Thegrowingavailability

ofandinterconnectionsbetweendifferentformsofdataarereconfiguringsocial

andgovernmentinnovationlandscapes.

Thechallengeofgeneratingandexploringsolutions.Inacontextinwhichissues

areseenasdynamic,multi-sitedandmulti-actor,thenadvocatesforsocialand

governmentinnovationoftenargueforanexperimentalapproach(egBreckon

2015).Differentkindsofexperimentalityemergeinresponsetodifferentsocial

orpolicyissuesinvolvingdifferentkindsoforganisationalapparatus.Some

approaches,forexample,healthcareimprovement(egRobertandMacdonald

2016),recognisethevalueoflocalactorswithastakeinanissuebeinginvolved

ingeneratingandco-producingsolutions–whichhandilycoincideswitha

smallerroleforgovernmentinaneo-liberalworld(Julier2017).Digital

platformsareoftenimplicatedintheworkofgoverning.Someresponsesto

socialorpublicpolicyissues,suchastheOpenIDEOdigitalplatformvpublish

openchallengessetbyapolicyteam,foundationorcorporatesponsorand

structureandenableprocessesthataimtoengagepeoplenotpreviously

connectedtoanissuetoexploreitandgenerateanditeratepossiblesolutions.

Alongsidethiskindofexperimentation,othertraditionshavebecomemore

visibleinsidegovernmentandpublicpolicy.Inparticularrandomisedcontrol

trialsadaptedfromclinicalsciencesarepromotedbysomefunders,researchers

andcivilservantsaswaystotestideasandprovideevidenceforpolicydecisions

about‘whatworks’,oftentiedtobehaviouraltheory(seePuttick2012;Halpern

2015)vi.Asinscienceandtechnologystudies(STS),forcivilservantsandsocial

entrepreneursapersistentpreoccupationisscale,notasananalyticalconstruct

butasanoperationalachievement:howcansolutionsdevelopedandtestedhere,

berolledoutandeffectivethere?

Thechallengeofunderstandingchange.Currentpracticeinsocialand

governmentinnovationtosomeextentrecognisesthatmultipleactorsare

involvedinconstitutinganissueandthenshapingpotentialresponsestodoing

somethingaboutitinordertoachieveintended‘outcomes’,recognisingthat

unintendedconsequenceswillalsoresult.Tounderstandaproblemorto

generateasolution,amanagerinavoluntarysectororganizationoracivil

servantmaybeaskedtoarticulatea‘theoryofchange’.Theoriesofchangein

playoftenforegroundmicro-socialworldsand‘choices’madebyindividuals

ratherthansocialpractices(e.g.Shoveetal2012)orareinformedby,drawon

anddeployformsoftechnologicaldeterminism(e.g.WilkieandMichael2008).

Somedomainssuchashealthcareimprovementallowanunderstandingof

changethatrecognizesmultiplekindsofsocialworldandresearchers’and

managers’participationwithinitalongsidethebeneficiariesofinterventionsor

usersofservices.Butinothercases,innovationtoolkitsviiandcallsforproposals

publishedbycommissionersofservicesspreadtheideathatsuchtheoriesof

changecanbeadequatelydescribedinapageortwo.Somefunders,forexample,

requireapplicantstodescribetheirtheoryofchangeunderpinningaproject(eg

Nesta2016).Elsewhere,methodsdrawingonparticipatorydesigninsocialor

policyinnovationworkshopsaskparticipantstomaterialisemodelsofpotential

solutionsandactoutthroughroleplayhowsolutionsmightchangeasituation

(Kimbell2015).Indescribinghowadesiredchangeinasocialworldmight

unfoldasaresultofaproposedintervention,participantsareaskedto

foreground‘barriers’tochangeandhowtheseneedtobeaddressedin

implementingasolution.Thetemporalandspatialorderingofhowchangeis

constituted,experienced,understood,assessedandevaluatedisdownplayed.

Discussionsofwhohasagencytomakechangeandtheconditionsand

possibilitiesaroundthisareoftenleftunexamined.

Thechallengeofparticipation.Fromdifferentperspectives,socialinnovationand

governmentinnovationarebothpremisedoncurrentandfuturerelations

betweenactorsinvolvedinanissue.Suchpracticesforegroundhumanactors

suchas‘users’,‘citizens’orpossibly‘beneficiaries’,oftenalreadyidentifiedas

involvedinanissueandhavingparticular‘needs’or‘capacities’.Insocial

innovationandgovernmentinnovationpractice,emergingactivitiesinclude

generatinginsightsaboutwhatishappeninginasocialworldfromthe

perspectiveofsuchactors;identifyingandmobilisingemergingpractices;

identifyingnon-obviousactorsinanissue;andengagingactorsingeneratingand

possiblyco-producingsolutions.Inthecaseofcaringforolderpeople,for

example,humanactorsmightincludepeopledirectlyexperiencingthesocialor

policychallenge(e.g.olderpeopleandtheirfamilies,friendsorneighbours),

professionals(e.g.socialworkers,healthvisitors,nurses),serviceproviders(e.g.

carersworkingformunicipalitiesorcommercialfirms),businesses(eg

entrepreneursorlocalshopsorutilities),researchers(socialorhealthcare

researchers,butalsodataanalysts),andvoluntaryorcommunitygroups(e.g.

thoseworkingwitholderpeopleorcarers).AperspectivefromSTSwouldalso

emphasisethenon-humanactorsthatco-constituteadultsocialcare,suchas

assistivetechnologies,particularkindsofhousingarrangementandlayout,

conceptssuchas‘ageing’and‘caring’andfinancialmodelsforcareservices.For

peopleself-identifyingassocialorgovernmentinnovators,acknowledgingand

engagingawidearrayofactorsmaybedriveninpartbyopennesstoemergence

aswellasdemocraticideals.Nonethelessexistingandfuturelevelsofagencyand

powerrelationsmaybeunder-examined.Forinnovatorsinsidegovernment,

participationhasacomplicatedrelationshiptoformaldemocraticstructuresand

processes,partypoliticsandthemedia.Forexampleinvitingresponsesviaan

onlineconsultationorthroughparticipationinapolicyworkshopcanprivilege

somecontributionsoverothers(egFortier2010).

Opportunitiesforinventiveapproaches

Thesebriefsummariesofsomeofthechallengesfacingthoseinvolvedinsocial

andgovernmentinnovationhavehighlightedsomeconcernsthatresonatewith

inventivesocialresearch.Whilesomereadersmayobjecttomyemphasison

relativelyshort-term,easily-traceableintervention,Iwanttoexplorewhat

inventivesocialresearchhasto‘offer’servicemanagers,deliverypartners,policy

makers,fundersorcommunitiesentangledwiththesechallenges.Howmight

inventivesocialresearchexpressandconnectsocialphenomenainthesettingsI

describe,resultinginchangesinhowthingsaredone,aswellasinnewinsights?

Howdoesitchallengedominantnotionsofinnovationingovernmentand

society?Thethingsthatinventivesocialresearchmightofferorprovoke,

however,arenotnecessarilywhattheseactorswant,value,orhavecapacityto

engagewith,atopictowhichIwillreturnlater.

Challengingthechallenge.Asindicatedinthisbook,acorecharacteristicof

inventivesocialresearchishowitproblematisesanissue.Insteadoftakingupa

challengeasinitiallyarticulatedorframed,inventivesocialresearchstartswitha

queryintoadomain.Itdoesnottakeasgiventheconstituentsofanissue.

Throughsuchresearch,asocialorpolicyinnovationchallengeislikelytobe

reconfigured.Thismayallowidentificationofspecificaspectsthatneed

addressing,oracknowledgementofdifferentactorsfromthoseoriginally

thoughttobepartoftheissue,orashiftinlocation,scaleortimeframe.For

exampleinhischapteronmakinginterventionstotheBarcelonaPavilion,Jacque

revealsthematerialpractices,objectsandmaterialsassociatedwithits

maintenanceandmanagement,bytemporarilyrecomposingtheconstituentsof

thepavilion.Forsocialorpolicyinnovators,inventivesocialsciencedraws

attentiontothepossibilitythatthechallengemotivatingtheirworkiscomposed

differentlythantheyoriginallyunderstood,whichcanberevealedthrough

creativeintervention.Theactorsorpublicsinvolvedinconstitutingthechallenge

mightnotbetheonesinitiallyassumedtobepartofit,andtheircapacitiesmight

alsobeotherthanoriginallyunderstood(StilgoeandGuston2017).

Sensitisingparticipantstothe‘socials’beingenacted.Inventivesocialresearch

doesnottakethe‘social’asagivenbutperformsanemergingunderstandingof

particularsocialsthroughexperimentalco-articulation–offeringan‘experiential

togetherness’asSavranskyobservesinhischapter.Byintentionallymodifying

settingsorpromptingactorstoexpressthemselvesorperformdifferently,social

phemomenabecomevisibleinnewways.Inventiveresearchrevealsthe

agenciesanddifferentkindsofsocialwhichmayco-existandinteractwithone

another.Beingabletoidentify,bringintoview,oranalysethesewithinaproject

canenablethoseworkinginsocialinnovationorgovernmentinnovationto

developandcontinuallyrevisetheirunderstandingsofthepolicydomainand

howpotentialsolutionsarereconfigured.Thiscanhelpthemthinkthroughthe

waysinwhichtheproblemmightchangeasexperimentationproceeds–and

drawattentiontohowaproject’sactivitiesareimplicatedinarticulating

particularsocials.

Generatinginfrastructures/practicesthatconstituteanissueorpublic.The

versionsofinventivesocialresearchthatcombinedesignandSTSresemble

somecontemporaryactivitieswithinsocialandgovernmentinnovation.

Expertisewhichbridgesresearchandpracticeisnowbeingdevelopedas

capabilitiesinsidegovernmentteamsandsocialinnovationnetworks.For

example,civilservantsintheUKgovernmentareusingcreativeapproachesthat

combinethedoing,representingandinterveninginpolicydevelopment(eg

Kimbell2015).Bycombiningdifferentkindsofresearch,materialisingmodelsof

potentialpoliciesandorganisingparticipatoryworkshops,multiple

understandingsofthepolicyissueandpotentialinterventionsarebroughtinto

view,changingtheissueandtheinstitutionofgovernment,notjustrepresenting

theissue.Forsocialorpolicyinnovators,adoptinganinventiveapproachwould

allowthemtobetterunderstandhowpolicyagendas,devices,workprogrammes

andpublicsareconfiguredrelationally.Itwouldallowsuchpractitionersto

recogniseandreflectontheirrolesindoinginfrastructuringworkbyproviding

resources,designingworkprogrammesandproducingdevicessuchasmodels,

frameworks,guidelinesandcriteria(egLeDantecandDisalvo2014;Hilgrenetal

2016).

Enablingattentivenesstoscaling.Scalingandthedistributionofagencyarelong-

standingconcernswithinSTSandareevidentininventiveapproachestosocial

research.ForexampleNold’smacroandmicroprototypesconnecttheissueof

noiseannoyanceatHeathrowandpublicswithinnewconfigurations.Wilkieand

Michael’schaptershowshowthesituatedperformancesofthenetworked

EnergyBabbledisruptedassumptionsoftheresearchfundersabout‘community’

andpolicyframingsabouttheusageofinformationfromsmartmeters.Inventive

socialresearchinsocialinnovationorgovernmentinnovationcontextscan

highlighthowscaleisperformed,ratherthanpre-existing,assumedorgiven.It

hasthepotentialtogeneratenewpossibilitiesenablingintendedoutcomestobe

identified,assessedandrevisedwhilebeingopentorecognizinghownovel

configurationsandconsequencesunfoldinpractice.

Openinguptheworkofresearching.Inventivesocialresearchdrawsontraditions

whichhighlightthedistributionofagencyacrosshumanandnon-humanactors

andthetranslationsinvolvedproducingknowledgeandachievingtechnological

change.MarresandGerlitz’saccountofacollaborativeanalysisofadatasetfrom

Twittershowedhowcategoriessuchas‘frequency’or‘volume’gotinthewayof

detectingthesocialityofTwitter,whichledtotheresearchteamrefocusingtheir

attentionondevelopingothermeanstoaccessdynamicinteractionsbetween

Twitteraccounts.IntheirchapterGuggenheimetalcombineobjects,situations

andpressuretodemonstratethe(creative)workthatgoesoninresearchingan

issue.Bringingtheseorientationsintosocialandgovernmentinnovationdraws

attentiontothematerialpractices,eventsandactorsinvolvedindoingand

representingresearchandinterveningintoanissue.Insteadofanalyzingand

reproducing‘whatworks’–acontemporarypreoccupationwithinsocialor

governmentinnovation,thisapproachcanhighlightwhatisrequiredfora

solutionto‘work’andthepracticalaccomplishmentsofdoingresearchinsocial

andgovernmentsettings.

Inshortthereispotentialforinventiveapproachestoengagedirectlywithsocial

innovationandgovernmentsettings.By‘directly’Imeanacademicresearchers

workingexperimentallyincollaborationwithpeople(whomayhaveresearch

training)inlocalorcentralgovernment,communityandvoluntarygroups,think

tanks,serviceproviders,entrepreneurs,activistsorothersinthepolicy

ecosystemwhoareengagedinunderstandingaproblemdomainandintervening

intoit.Someofthechallengessuchindividualsorteamsfaceindoingtheworkof

socialorgovernmentinnovationpresentopportunitiestoenactnovelkindsof

doing,representingandinterveninginsocialworlds.Whilethismaybedriven

by,andresultin,theprioritisationofshort-term,easilytraceableassociations,on

theotherhandthereisalsopotentialforinventiveresearchtointervenetooin

institutionalpractices,devicesandnarrativesthatdrivethisshort-termism.

Implications

Inventivesocialresearchcanproblematiseaccountsofpolicyissuesand

potentialsolutionsdevelopedinrelationtothem.Itcanproposemodesofdoing

researchbyopeninguptheoriesofchange,identifyinghowscaleoperates,

acknowledginghumanandnon-humanconstituentsandagency,andexamining

thegovernanceandstylesofparticipationenactedinaproject.Insodoing,new

possibilitieswillemerge.Byengagingexperimentallyinreconfiguringprojects

thataimtoaddresssocialorpublicpolicyissues,researchersmayhelparticulate

anddetectnewsocials;developnewdevices,infrastructuresandmethods;and

produceunderstandingoftheirgenealogies,possibilitiesandlimits.Theymay

alsobeabletosituatethemselvesmorecloselyinrelationtosomeofthe

challengesthatserviceproviders,policymakersandactivistsareinvolvedinby

co-producing‘change’aswellas‘knowledge’(FacerandEnright2016).

Withthepossibilityofcloserengagementbetweeninventivesocialresearchand

socialandgovernmentinnovationcomeanumberofmattersthatneedfurther

consideration.Thefirstisthedifferenttemporalitiesthatcomeintoplayinthe

worldsofacademicresearch,whichmaynotbealignedwiththosewithinsocial

innovationandpolicyexperimentation.Academiahasitsowntemporal

intensitiesthatemerge,forexample,whenapplyingforfunding,doingresearch,

presentingatworkshopsorconferences,andwritingpapersorbooks,aswellas

movingbetweenjobsorinstitutions.Someofthesetakeplaceoverdaysor

weeks;somemaytakeplaceoverseveralyears.Withinsocialinnovationand

governmentinnovation,timescalesareequallyvariedandintense.Invitationsto

tendermayhavedeadlinesofweeksormonths,researchundertakentoshape

policymakingmaytakemonths,whileeffortstoresearch,developandredesign

aservicemighttakemonthsoryears.Incontrastaministermightwantapolicy

recommendationtobeproducedinamatterofdays;acampaigntochange

regulationsorthelawmighttakeyears.Aligningtheperspectivesandresources

ofresearchersinrelationtoorganisationalroutinesandresourcesinsidepublic

administrationsandtheorganisationalecosystemsaroundthemisnotatrivial

matterbutasGuggenheimetalargue,theapplicationofpressuremaybe

productive.

Asecondandrelatedissueistheaccountabilitiesheldbydifferentactors

involvedinaninventivecollaboration.Academicsmightholdthemselves

accountabletocolleagues,currentorfuturestudents,theirinstitutions,funders,

professionalbodiesorpartnersfromcivilsociety,businessorthepublicsector.

Managers,volunteers,activistsorcivilservantshaveotheraccountabilities

whichmightincludetocolleagues,professionalbodies,serviceusersor

residents,fundersanddonors,organisationalpartners,codesofpractice,orto

publicbodiessuchasparliament.Bringingintoviewandarticulatingdistinct

accountabilitiesatdifferentlevelsofinstitutionalisationandformality,

recognizingthattheseaccountabilitiesmaycontinuetochange,requires

attentionandreflexivity.

Athirdissueisthejostlingforpowerandnegotiationsbetweendifferentkindsof

expertiserequiredtodoinventivesocialresearch,whichalsoemergesinother

kindsofappliedacademicresearch.IntheirchapterGuggenheimetalpropose

thatexperts‘accompany’alaypersonalonganexperimentalpath.Doing

inventivesocialresearchinthecontextofsocialorgovernmentinnovation

requiresawarenessofdifferentkindsandsitesofexpertiseandthe

infrastructures,practicesanddevicesthatenablethis.Indifferentways,the

contributorstothisbookrevealsomeoftheskillsandknowledgerequiredto

undertakeinventivesocio-materialandaestheticexperiments.Asthe

connectionsbetweensocialandgovernmentinnovatorsandcreativepractices

continueintensify,newpatternsofexpertisewillemergewithininventive

research.Moreintersectionsbetweenthekindsofacademicresearchdiscussed

inthisvolumeandthepracticesIhavedescribedwillleadtothedevelopmentof

newtools,bureaucraticrelationshipsandsystemsofvalorisationand

governance.

Eachoftheseissuesshapesthematerialpractices,devices,infrastructuresand

processesofdoinginventiveresearchinthecontextsofsocialandgovernment

innovation.Bybeingattentivetotemporalities,accountabilitiesandexpertiseas

constitutiveofinventiveresearch,suchexperimentalcollaborationswillplayout

differently.

Toconclude,thissketchhassuggestedhowinventivesocialresearchmight

engagewithcurrentpreoccupationsandpracticesinsocialinnovationand

governmentinnovation.Sharedconcernsincludeexperimentation,systems,

participationandthereorderingandreconfiguringofasocialworldandthe

politicsofsodoing.Bydrawingattentiontotheprocessualreconfiguringof

resourcesandrelationsthroughachangeprocess,inventiveresearchersand

theircollaboratorsinsocialinnovationandgovernmentsettingsmayadd

nuance,criticalappreciationofandinsighttotheclaimsmadeforandabout

innovation.MyhopeisthatmydescriptionofthechallengesIseeinsocialand

governmentinnovationandbriefoutlineofhowthiscouldunfoldwillsparknew

engagements.Attheveryleast,thisaccountmaypromptinterestamong

researchersinsomeofthesesettingsinmoreinventivedoing,representingand

intervening.

References

Bernstein,J.H.,‘Transdisciplinarity:Areviewofitsorigins,development,and

currentissues’,JournalofResearchPractice,11(1),2015,ArticleR1.Retrieved

fromhttp://jrp.icaap.org/index.php/jrp/article/view/510/412Accessed2July,

2017).


Breckon,J.,BetterPublicServicesThroughExperimentalGovernment,(London:

AllianceforUsefulEvidence,2015).

Chen,D.-S.,Cheng,L.-L.,Hummels,C.,andKoskinen,I.,‘Socialdesign:An

introduction’,InternationalJournalofDesign,2016,10(1),1-5.

Dunleavy,P.‘”Bigdata”andpolicylearning’,inGerryStokerandMarkEvans,

eds,MethodsthatMatter:SocialScienceandEvidence-BasedPolicymaking,

(Bristol:ThePolicyPress,2016).

Eggers,W.andMacmillan,P.,TheSolutionRevolution:HowBusiness,Government,

andSocialEnterprisesAreTeamingUptoSolveSociety'sToughestProblems,

(Boston:HarvardBusinessSchoolPublishing,2013).

Facer,K.andEnright,B.,CreatingLivingKnowledge.TheConnectedCommunities

Programme,CommunityUniversityRelationshipsandtheParticipatoryTurninthe

ProductionofKnowledge,(Bristol:UniversityofBristol/AHRCConnected

Communities,2016).

Fortier,A-M.‘Proximitybydesign?AffectiveCitizenshipandtheManagementof

Unease’,CitizenshipStudies,2010,14(1):17-30.

Garud,R.,Tuertscher,P.andVandeVen,A.‘PerspectivesonInnovation

Processes’,TheAcademyofManagementAnnals,2013,7(1):775-819.

GovernmentDigitalService,‘Agiledelivery’,2016,

[accessed4December

2016].

Halpern,D.,InsidetheNudgeUnit:HowSmallChangesCanMakeaBigDifference,

(London:Penguin,2016).

Hillgren,P.A.,Seravalli,A.andErikson,M.,‘Counter-hegemonicPractices;

DynamicInterplayBetweenAgonism,CommoningandStrategicDesign’,

StrategicDesignResearchJournal,2016,9(2):89-99.

Julier,G.,EconomiesofDesign.(London:Sage,2017).

Julier,G.andKimbell,L.,Co-producingSocialFuturesThroughDesignResearch,

(Brighton:UniversityofBrighton,2016).

Kimbell,L.,ApplyingDesignApproachestoPolicyMaking:DiscoveringPolicyLab,

(Brighton:UniversityofBrighton,2015).

LeDantec,C.A.andC.DiSalvo,‘Infrastructuringandtheformationofpublics’,

SocialStudiesofScience,2013,43(2):241–264.

Mazzucato,M.,TheEntrepreneurialState–DebunkingPublicvs.PrivateSector

Myths,(London:AnthemPress,2013).

Mulgan,G.,Tucker,S.Ali,R.andSanders,B.,SocialInnovation:WhatItIs,WhyIt

MattersandHowItCanBeAccelerated.(Oxford:SkollCentreforSocial

Entrepreneurship,2006).

Nesta/TheSocialInnovationPartnership.‘GuidanceforDevelopingaTheoryof

ChangeforYourProgramme’,2016,

[accessed2November2016].


Nicholls,A.andMurdock,A.,eds,SocialInnovation:BlurringBoundariesto

ReconfigureMarkets,(Basingstoke:PalgraveMacMillan,2011).

Noveck,B.,SmartCitizens,SmarterState:ThetechnologiesofExpertiseandthe

FutureofGoverning,(Cambridge:HarvardUniversityPress,2015).

OECD.(2016).ObservatoryofPublicSectorInnovation.

[accessed2

September2016].


Puttick,R.WhyWeNeedtoCreateaNICEforSocialPolicy,(London:Nesta,2012).

Puttick,R.,Baeck,P.andColligan,P.,I-teams.TheTeamsandFundsMaking

InnovationHappeninGovernmentsAroundtheWorld.(London:

Nesta/BloombergPhilanthropies,2014).

Ries,E.TheLeanStartUp.HowRelentlessChangeCreatesRadicallySuccessful

Businesses.(NewYork:CrownBusiness,2011).

Rittel,H.W.J.andWebber,M.M.,‘DilemmasinaGeneralTheoryofPlanning’,

PolicySciences,1973,4:155-169.

Robert,G.andA.Macdonald.‘Co-design,OrganisationalCreativityandQuality

ImprovementintheHealthcareSector:“Designerly”or“Design-like”?’inD.

SangiorgiandA.Prendiville,eds,,DesigningforService:KeyIssuesandDirections,

117-129(London:Bloomsbury,2017).

Shove,E.,Pantzar,M.andWatson,M.TheDynamicsofSocialPractice

EverydayLifeandHowitChanges.(London:Sage,2012).

Snowden,D.,andM.Boone,‘ALeader’sFrameworkforDecisionMaking’,

HarvardBusinessReview,(November,2007)

Stilgoe,J.andGuston,D.,‘Responsibleresearchandinnovation’,inFelt,U.,

Fouché,R.,Miller,C.andSmith-Doerr,L.,eds,4thedition,HandbookofScience

andTechnologyStudies,2017,853-880

Williamson,B.‘Thedigitalmethodsandimaginationofinnovationlabs’,,2015,

,[accessed21September2015]

YoungFoundation,History,2017,[accessed11June2017].

iIhavebeeninvolvedindifferentwayswithinthesedevelopmentsforoveradecade:asaneducatorteachingdesignthinkingtoMBAstudentsandsocialentrepreneurs;asformerheadofsocialdesignatTheYoungFoundation;asaresearcherstudyingsocialdesignfortheArtsandHumanitiesResearchCouncil(AHRC);asaresearcherembeddedforayearinPolicyLab,ateamintheCabinetOfficeoftheUKgovernmentviaanAHRCfellowship;asaconsultanthelpinggovernmentbodiesdevelopdesigncapabilities;asauserofpublicservices;andasanactivistwhereIlive.iiThereisalongtraditionofthinktanksintheUKandotherpolicyecosystemswhichcarryoutresearchandundertakeexperimentsinrelationtosocialissuesthataresometimestranslatedintopublicpolicy.AnearlyexamplewastheInstituteofCommunityStudiessetupbyMichaelYoungin1952.Throughhis

writing,workontheLabourPartymanifestoin1945,involvementinthecreationofinstitutionssuchastheOpenUniversity,Younghaslongbeenrecognizedanearlysocialinnovatorwhoseexpertisebridgedsocialresearch,publicpolicyandorganistionalaction(YoungFoundation2017).iiiAnexerciseinwhichparticipantsnotedownandthensharechallengesintheform‘howcanwe…?”iscommonintheworkofPolicyLab,ateamintheUKgovernment’sCabinetOffice.Seehttps://www.slideshare.net/Openpolicymaking/policy-lab-slide-share-introduction-final[accessed11June2016].ivTheUK’sinnovationagencyNestasetupaChallengePrizeCentrein2012tostudyandpromote‘challenge-based’innovation,[accessed11June2016].vInternationaldesignconsultancyIDEO’splatformpartnerswithfoundations,corporatesponsorsandgovernmentbodiestosetchallengesforitsuserstorespondto,,[accessed11June2016].viAleadingexamplehereistheUK-basedinternationalBehaviouralInsightsTeamoriginallysetupintheUKgovernment’sCabinetOffice,whichitnowco-ownswiththeUKinnovationcharityNestaandtheseniormanagementteam.SeetheaccountofitschiefexecutiveDavidHalpern(2015).Suchapproachesarenotwithoutcriticism.viiSeeforexampletheDevelopmentImpactandYouToolkitaimedatpeopleworkingindevelopmentcontexts,producedbyUKinnovationagencyNestaandfundedbytheRockefellerFoundation,,[accessed11June2016].